Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Martin Tomitsch - Non-human personas and other UX tools for a post-pandemic world

uxaustralia
August 24, 2021

Martin Tomitsch - Non-human personas and other UX tools for a post-pandemic world

UX Australia 2021 DAY 1

We urgently need to rethink the role of human-centred design in light of global events that are linked to the Anthropocene, such as extreme weather and the Covid-19 pandemic.

When designing physical products, there is a very tangible impact on the environment. But how are digital platforms affecting our ecosystems? And what can we as UX designers do to do our share in ensuring we sustain the health of our planet when designing digital products?

The talk provides answers to these questions and a call to action, equipping UX designers with the tools to include more-than-human perspectives and to think about the far-reaching impact of our design decisions. Who has created a persona for the coronavirus, which many of us would have had to consider as a stakeholder in the past year? There’s your first non-human persona!

Join this talk to learn how to use more-than-human design thinking in your next project.

uxaustralia

August 24, 2021
Tweet

More Decks by uxaustralia

Other Decks in Design

Transcript

  1. Non-human personas
    and other UX tools for
    a post-pandemic world
    (he/him)


    @martintom


    #UXA2021
    Martin Tomitsch

    View full-size slide

  2. “We don’t see
    things as they
    are, we see
    things as we
    are.” – Anaïs Nin


    View full-size slide

  3. Users
    UX
    Needs/desires

    View full-size slide

  4. Users
    UX
    Needs/desires Satisfaction

    View full-size slide

  5. Users
    UX
    Needs/desires Satisfaction
    Other
    stakeholders

    View full-size slide

  6. Users
    UX
    Needs/desires Satisfaction
    Other
    stakeholders
    Non-human
    stakeholders
    360-degree
    perspective

    View full-size slide

  7. The University of Sydney

    View full-size slide

  8. Human-centred design
    Source: unknown

    View full-size slide

  9. Technology


    (feasibility)
    Business


    (viability)
    Human values


    (usability, desirability)
    Innovation
    Diagram based on original diagram by IDEO

    View full-size slide

  10. Technology


    (feasibility)
    Business


    (viability)
    Human values


    (usability, desirability)
    Innovation
    Shareholder
    primacy

    View full-size slide

  11. … the world is working exactly

    as designed. And it’s not working
    very well. Which means
    we
    need to do a
    better job of
    designing it.



    —Mike Monteiro

    View full-size slide

  12. Source: https://www.wwf.org.au/what-we-do/bushfires

    View full-size slide

  13. Source: https://twitter.com/newsmary/status/390707330599231488

    View full-size slide

  14. Source: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-07-16/over-60-people-have-died-in-flooding-in-europe/13447880

    View full-size slide

  15. The Australian wildfires and
    COVID-19 were a

    “wake-up
    call” … infectious
    diseases that come from
    animals are a sign of an
    “unhealthy
    planet”
    Source: https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/shocking-facts-david-attenborough-netflix-film/| Photo courtesy of Netflix

    View full-size slide

  16. Source: https://www.upstatefilms.org/anthropocene

    View full-size slide

  17. Source: Credit: Itai Raveh | Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/human-made-stuff-now-outweighs-all-life-on-earth/
    Humans vs. planet

    View full-size slide

  18. Humans vs. planet
    Source: Credit: Itai Raveh | Source: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/human-made-stuff-now-outweighs-all-life-on-earth/

    View full-size slide

  19. The University of Sydney

    View full-size slide

  20. Source: Photo by Joel & Jasmin Førestbird on Unsplash

    View full-size slide

  21. Source: Photo by Jasmin Sessler on Unsplash

    View full-size slide

  22. 🚙 Your commute to work.


    📧 Sending emails.


    🚮 What you put into the landfill.


    😹 Watching funny cat videos.



    Source: https://twitter.com/salesforce/status/1424778561169264655

    View full-size slide

  23. 🚙 Your commute to work.


    📧 Sending emails.


    🚮 What you put into the landfill.


    😹 Watching funny cat videos.


    Believe it or not, *all* of these things have
    an impact on the environment.

    Source: https://twitter.com/salesforce/status/1424778561169264655

    View full-size slide

  24. 💻 Digital consumption:
    3.7% of global
    greenhouse emissions


    ✈ Aviation: 2.4%
    Source: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200305-why-your-internet-habits-are-not-as-clean-as-you-think
    60% goes into streaming of videos

    View full-size slide

  25. Source: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200305-why-your-internet-habits-are-not-as-clean-as-you-think

    View full-size slide

  26. If every adult in the UK sent one
    less ‘thank you’ email, it could
    save 16,433 tonnes of carbon a
    year – the equivalent to taking
    3,334 diesel cars off the road.
    Source: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200305-why-your-internet-habits-are-not-as-clean-as-you-think

    View full-size slide

  27. Source: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-18/bitcoin-has-a-climate-problem/13210376

    View full-size slide

  28. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/24/technology/computer-energy-use-study.html (Paywall)

    View full-size slide

  29. The University of Sydney

    View full-size slide

  30. Human values


    (usability, desirability)
    Business


    (viability)
    Technology


    (feasibility)
    Responsible
    innovation
    Environmental and
    ethical values


    (responsibility)
    “… replacing what is
    viable in the business
    sense with what is
    responsible in the
    moral sense.”
    Forlano (2016), Tatum (2004)

    View full-size slide

  31. @IN T ER ACT IONSM AG
    60 IN T ER ACT IONS M AY JUNE 2019
    In this forum we highlight innovative thought, design, and research in the area of interaction design and sustainability,
    illustrating the diversity of approaches across HCI communities. — Roy Bendor, Editor
    FORUM SUSTAINABILIT Y IN (INTER)ACTION
    More-Than-Human Participation:
    Design for Sustainable
    Smart City Futures
    ENCOUNTERING
    MORE THAN HUMAN WORLDS
    In the age of the Anthropocene—the
    most recent geological era, in which
    human activity is transforming
    Earth systems, accelerating
    climate change, and causing mass
    extinctions—a human-centered
    perspective of cities is increasingly
    seen as untenable [3]. In elds such as
    science and technology studies (STS),
    environmental humanities, geography,
    planning, ne art, design, and HCI,
    scholars are challenging traditional
    binaries such as culture/nature and
    human/non-human, to consider the
    entanglements between human and
    non-human worlds, including “things,
    objects, other animals, living beings,
    organisms, physical forces, spiritual
    entities” [4] in urban contexts.
    For instance, projects such as
    Mitigation of Shock, a speculative
    design project by Super ux design
    studio, interrogates food scarcity in
    2050 through an installation of a
    reconstructed apartment in London.
    Where there was once a lounge, a large
    food lab now dominates, made from
    recycled and salvaged electronics and
    everyday homeware. While exploring
    how food shortages prompted by
    climate change could be reimagined
    through alternative domestic food
    production, Anab Jain has described
    how a more meaningful codependent
    relationship emerged with the plants [5]:
    The project gave birth to new
    relationships, as we moved from just
    making things, to making things that
    grew.… We saw how roots were born,
    how they were formed and grew into these
    delicate ecologies, how they transformed
    Out of necessity or choice,
    people and wildlife
    are increasingly living
    side by side in urban
    environments. As more
    species live together
    in cities, significant
    environmental challenges associated
    with high-density living, poor
    resource management, habitat loss,
    and pollution arise. These conditions
    can be toxic for humans and non-
    humans alike.
    One response has been to make
    cities “smart” using networked
    sensing and cloud and mobile
    computing to optimize, control, and
    regulate urban processes. Smart
    initiatives are often presented as a
    social and environmental good. An
    accompanying agenda, however,
    has been to spur on sales of novel
    technology, with its attendant bene ts
    for a small number of companies
    and their employees. In other words,
    smart cities are often positioned as
    solving environmental problems
    through technologically driven,
    human-centered, and solution-
    optimizing approaches that promise
    great bene t—but include a number of
    faulty premises.
    While many governments are
    developing participatory approaches
    to sustainability challenges, the focus
    remains largely human centered. Such
    approaches are often too simplistic to
    address the complexities of long-term
    environmental sustainability. They
    also fail to acknowledge how human
    and non-human lives—or the “more
    than human”—are inseparable, and
    how we all participate in urban life [1].
    Without care, smart city agendas may
    exacerbate the very problems they seek
    to solve.
    What will it take to create a
    real shift in the mindsets of those
    responsible for smart city design, for
    those people to take a more-than-
    human participatory perspective?
    What can we, as designers and
    educators, do to respond to the
    environmental challenges our future
    cities face?
    In this article, we propose an
    alternative smart city agenda for the
    interaction design community in
    responding to a more-than-human
    perspective. To help us explore and
    imagine what this agenda could be
    like, we illustrate our discussion
    with examples shared as part of an
    interdisciplinary workshop at the 2018
    Participatory Design Conference in
    Hasselt, Belgium [2].
    Insights
    → Smart city agendas remain
    focused on human-centered
    approaches despite the diversity
    of species in urban areas.
    → To broaden participation
    for sustainability in smart
    city design, a more-than-
    human perspective should
    be adopted.
    → Supporting future research
    and practice requires
    consolidating existing
    approaches, engendering
    sensitivities to multiple
    species’ timescales and
    knowledges, and investing in
    interdisciplinary pedagogy.
    Rachel Clarke, Northumbria University, Sara Heitlinger, City, University of London, Ann Light, University of Sussex,
    Laura Forlano, Illinois Institute of Technology, Marcus Foth, Queensland University of Technology,
    Carl DiSalvo, Georgia Institute of Technology
    DesignIssues: Volume 32, Number 3 Summer 2016
    42
    © 2016 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    Decentering the Human in the
    Design of Collaborative Cities
    Laura Forlano
    Cities around the world are currently rushing to build sensor net-
    works capable of tracking pollution and crime; connect their traffic
    lights, street lamps, garbage cans, and parking meters to the Inter-
    net; and reform industrial innovation regions into postindustrial
    hubs for digital design and fabrication. The networked character of
    the socio-technical landscape has forced collisions between the
    city, its infrastructure, and its citizens. Of course, these efforts are
    rife with technological determinism and Silicon Valley buzzwords
    such as “smart cities,” the “Internet of things,” and 3D printing,
    but they also signify new terrain for the practice of civically
    engaged, tech-savvy designers. For example, the street furniture,
    fixtures, casings, and interfaces for these networked and interac-
    tive infrastructures must be aesthetically (and politically) designed
    to suit the city and the surrounding urban environment. More
    important, designers can play a role in mediating between the top-
    down plans of government officials and their corporate suitors and
    the bottom-up actions of citizens and civic technologists. In this
    sense, we might consider design as a hybrid and liminal practice—
    one that occupies “a position at, or on both sides of, a boundary or
    threshold.”1 Increasingly, designers must operate simultaneously
    at multiple scales (such as the urban, architecture and the built
    environment, objects, things and bodies) and often contradictory
    perspectives (including human as well as nonhuman stakehold-
    ers)—to remake the collaborative, peer-produced, open-source
    city.2 This article extends previous arguments about decenter-
    ing the human and nonanthropocentric design to think through
    ways designers can evolve existing human-centered design
    (HCD) methodologies to contend with socio-technical complex-
    ity—such as economic and ecological crisis—and create more
    responsible, accountable, and ethical ways of engaging with
    emerging technologies.3
    Designers are increasingly engaged in projects that go
    beyond crafting individual graphics or products and toward
    the design of services, organizations, systems, platforms, and
    experiences. As designers take on these roles, they are engaged in
    the active creation and curation of complex socio-technical net-
    works, constituencies, and alliances that come together around
    1 See Oxford Dictionaries online, http://
    www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/
    english/liminal (accessed June 22, 2015).
    2 Laura Forlano, “Work and the Open
    Source City,” Urban Omnibus (June 3,
    2009), http://urbanomnibus.net/2009/06/
    work-and-the-open-source-city/; Laura
    Forlano, “Building the Open Source City:
    New Work Environments for Collabora-
    tion and Innovation,” in From Social
    Butterfly to Engaged Citizen, Marcus
    Foth et al., eds. (Cambridge, MA: MIT
    Press, 2011).
    3 Carl DiSalvo and Jonathan Lukens,
    “Seeing the City through Machines:
    Non-Anthropocentric Design and Youth
    Robotics,” in Digital Cities 6: Concepts,
    Methods and Systems of Urban Informat-
    ics, Marcus Foth, Laura Forlano, and
    Hiromitsu Hattori, eds. (State College:
    Penn State University Press, 2009); Carl
    DiSalvo and Jonathan Lukens, “Nonath-
    ropocentrism and the Nonhuman in
    Design: Possibilities for Designing New
    Forms of Engagement with and through
    Technology,” in From Social Butterfly to
    Engaged Citizen: Urban Informatics,
    Social Media, Ubiquitous Computing, and
    Mobile Technology to Support Citizen
    Engagement, Marcus Foth et al., eds.
    (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011).
    doi: 10.1162/DESI_a_00398

    View full-size slide

  32. Source: https://cassierobinson.medium.com/beyond-human-centred-design-to-501a994f3123


    https://uxdesign.cc/a-holistic-design-toolkit-for-life-centred-design-cc229faefa28

    View full-size slide

  33. Source: Kirsten Moegerlein's PhD thesis 'Designing in Transition: Towards Intimacy in Ecological Uncertainty’ (via Kimberley Crofts on Twitter)

    View full-size slide

  34. Based on: Gibson, R. (2001), Specification of Sustainability-Based Environmental Assessment Decision Criteria and Implications for
    Determining ‘Significance’ in Environmental Assessment”, https://static.twoday.net/NE1BOKU0607/files/Gibson_Sustainability-EA.pdf

    View full-size slide

  35. dition
    Design.
    Think.
    Make.
    Break.
    Repeat.
    A Handbook
    of Methods
    Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat.
    A Handbook of Methods
    “Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do
    eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut
    enim ad minim veniam, quis” - Quote author
    This book introduces the reader to the changing role of design as a way of
    thinking and a framework for solving complex problems and achieving systemic
    change. It documents 80 methods that cover all stages of a design process,
    providing actionable guidance for applying the methods across a range of
    projects. The methods are complemented by seven case studies to demonstrate
    their application in different domains, from designing interfaces for autonomous
    vehicles to addressing health and wellbeing. Free templates and resources,
    available at designthinkmakebreakrepeat.com, make this a great resource for
    design educators as well as practitioners leading workshops in their organisation
    or looking for inspiration to transform their practice.
    In this revised edition, the authors look beyond the human-centred design
    paradigm and provide an introduction to life-centred design. This extended focus
    is reinforced through design methods for considering the broader ecosystem
    in which products and services are used, including the use of natural resources,
    ethical concerns and the long-term impact of design decisions.
    Design.
    Think.
    Make.
    Break.
    Repeat.
    A Handbook
    of Methods
    Authors
    Martin Tomitsch (ed.)
    Madeleine Borthwick (ed.)
    Naseem Ahmadpour
    Clare Cooper
    Jessica Frawley
    Leigh-Anne Hepburn
    A. Baki Kocaballi
    Lian Loke
    Claudia Nunez-Pacheco
    Karla Straker
    Cara Wrigley
    9 789063 695859
    ISBN 978-90-636958-5-9
    Revised: 20 new methods
    and an introduction to
    life-centred design

    View full-size slide

  36. EXERCISE YOU WILL NEED
    ACADEMIC
    RESOURCES:
    Based on your chosen brief, pick a
    scientific principle or technology and
    build a fictional world around it. Include
    an explanation of what it is and how
    it fits in the world you are creating.
    Develop the characters in your story and
    the locations where the action will take
    place. Record your ideas in the template
    using notes or bullet points.
    [10 minutes]
    Introduce the science or technology
    into the narrative of your story. This step
    is called the scientific inflection point.
    Again, use notes or bullet point form to
    explore this.
    [5 minutes]
    Explore what implications and
    ramifications your science or technology
    have on the world you created. Does it
    affect people’s lives for better or worse?
    Is there a risk that it might lead to a
    disaster or even the end of the world as
    we know it? This step is referred to as the
    ramifications of the science or technology
    on people.
    [10 minutes]
    With the science or technology now
    being part of the future scenario,
    describe what happens next. If there
    was a disaster, how could it be fixed
    to save the world? Does the science or
    technology need to be modified? This
    step is referred to as the human inflection
    point.
    [10 minutes]
    Develop your outline into a full science
    fiction story, if you have time to do so.
    Otherwise use the outline for ideation
    purposes, in step 6.
    Reflect on what you learned from
    creating the outline of your science
    fiction story. What are possible
    implications, solutions or lessons learned?
    What are aspects that could be taken into
    the current reality and integrated into an
    envisioned solution that addresses your
    chosen brief?
    [10 minutes]
    Pen, paper
    In this exercise, you will use the “five steps” template (p.X) to develop a narrative
    science fiction prototype. Focus on your design problem, or choose the Autonomous
    Vehicles brief (p.X).
    Dourish, P., & Bell, G. (2014).
    Resistance is futile: reading
    science fiction alongside
    ubiquitous computing.
    Personal and Ubiquitous
    Computing, 18(4), 769-778.
    Johnson, B. D. (2011). Science
    fiction prototyping: Designing
    the future with science
    fiction. Synthesis Lectures
    on Computer Science, 3(1),
    1-190.
    Shedroff, N., & Noessel, C.
    (2012). Make It So: Interaction
    Design Lessons from Science
    Fiction. Brooklyn, New York,
    USA: Rosenfeld Media.
    Science fiction prototypes are stories
    placed in the distant future. They allow
    the fictional exploration of scenarios, in
    which people interact with envisioned
    products or services. The narrative of the
    story is based on real scientific principles
    and technologies but explores their use in
    an environment that is free of constraints.
    The story follows a set structure, which
    includes identifying the characters, the
    scientific principle or technology, and so
    on. Critically, the narrative should include
    an inflection point, possibly leading to a
    disaster, as well as an exploration of the
    implications and how the characters can
    recover or overcome this disaster.
    Once a story narrative is developed,
    it is turned into either a prototype
    representation of how an envisioned
    product or service would be used in the
    future. This is often an essay, comic or
    movie. However, even the skeleton of
    the narrative can be a useful artefact in a
    design process.
    The science fiction prototype can then be
    used to reflect on which of its elements
    could be brought back into the current
    design situation. The method is used for
    speculative prototyping as well as ideation
    – by using elements from the science
    fiction prototype to inform the design of a
    solution.
    Science fiction prototyping is used by
    tech companies as a way to explore
    how their technology will be used in
    future scenarios. For example, Intel uses
    this method to determine how people
    will be interacting with semiconductor-
    based products in the future, which
    helps them to identify requirements for
    the development of new semiconductor
    technology. Science fiction prototypes are
    also useful to communicate speculative
    ideas and scenarios within design teams.
    Science Fiction
    Prototyping
    Using the future to improve the now
    1 4
    5
    6
    3
    2
    110 111
    Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat.
    Science Fiction Prototyping
    EXERCISE YOU WILL NEED
    ACADEMIC
    RESOURCES:
    Reflect on the user of the product or
    service you have in mind. If you need a
    topic, you can use a sample persona (URL)
    and focus on one of the following:
    E.g. Getting money out of an ATM
    E.g. Purchasing concert tickets
    E.g. Making a cup of coffee
    [3 minutes]
    Write down three to five key steps
    that the user would go through when
    interacting with the product or service.
    Plan what ‘shots’ and techniques you
    could use to illustrate these steps. Shots
    can include:
    • Wide shot: showing the surrounding
    context
    • Long shot: showing a person with
    their body fully visible and his/her
    surrounds
    • Medium shot: showing a person’s
    head and shoulders
    • Over-the-shoulder shot: looking at
    things “over the shoulder” of a person
    • Point of view shot: showing things
    through a person’s eyes
    • Close-up shot: showing a detailed
    view of a device or interface
    [5 minutes]
    Draw your storyboard in the template.
    Try to begin with a ‘wide shot’ to
    establish an impression of where the
    story begins and to introduce the objects
    or people that are important.
    [5 minutes]
    For each remaining step illustrate what
    the person would do. You can just use
    simple symbols and stick figures. Use a
    variety of shots to show relevant parts
    of the environment and the interactions
    between the person and the evaluated
    product or service.
    [15 minutes]
    Add short captions to describe each
    step. Ideally, every panel should show a
    single action accompanied by a sentence
    explaining the action. To improve your
    storyboard try the following:
    • Use bold outlines or highlight colours
    to draw attention to important parts
    • Use arrows to indicate important
    directions of movement
    [5 minutes]
    Paper, pens, coloured
    pencil
    In this exercise, you will create a storyboard documenting an existing situation or
    demonstrating a new design idea. Use the provided template (p.X) to get started.
    Greenberg, S., Carpendale,
    S., Marquardt, N., & Buxton,
    B. (2011). Sketching user
    experiences: The workbook.
    Elsevier.
    Truong, K. N., Hayes, G.
    R., & Abowd, G. D. (2006).
    Storyboarding: an empirical
    determination of best
    practices and effective
    guidelines. In Proceedings
    of the Designing Interactive
    systems (pp. 12-21). ACM.
    Davidoff, S., Lee, M. K., Dey,
    A. K., & Zimmerman, J.
    (2007, September). Rapidly
    exploring application design
    through speed dating. In
    International Conference on
    Ubiquitous Computing (pp.
    429-446). Springer Berlin
    Heidelberg.
    Storyboards in design are used to visually
    explore the interactions between people
    and products or services. They can
    either represent an existing situation or
    communicate an envisioned situation.
    When depicting existing situations, the
    story should be based on real data, for
    example, collected through contextual
    observation (p.X). Storyboards of existing
    situations are effective for highlighting
    issues with current experiences.
    Storyboards of envisioned situations can
    be used for evaluating early concepts
    with other team members or prospective
    users and for communicating concepts to
    others.
    Storyboards can be either hand-drawn
    or digitally composed illustrations that
    take techniques from film-making and
    comics. They consist of rectangular frames
    arranged horizontally or vertically in
    temporal order to narrate a story. Each
    frame represents a ‘shot’, similar to the
    use of storyboards in film. Speech and
    thought bubbles are used to represent
    dialogues and thought processes. To keep
    the story easily accessible, the number
    of panels should be between three and
    six. If more panels are needed, they can
    be included as an additional storyboard.
    Details in a panel are used to focus the
    viewer’s attention on the important
    parts of the scenario such as one of the
    characters interacting with a product.
    Descriptions above or below each panel
    are used to explain the scene within
    the panel. Time can be indicated either
    explicitly using a clock or calendar, or
    through implicit indicators such as a rising
    sun or contextual dialogues.
    The characters in the story should be
    based on user representations, for
    example in the form of personas (p.X) or
    extreme characters (p.X). Characters can
    interact with each other as well as the
    explored product or service to express
    emotions and relationships.
    Using the power of comics to explain
    concepts
    Storyboarding
    1 3
    4
    5
    2
    118 119
    Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat.
    Storyboarding
    EXERCISE YOU WILL NEED
    A pen
    In this exercise, you will create a user journey map using the template provided (p X).
    Before you start, you will need a good understanding of the current user experience
    based on prior research. You can follow the Supermarket of the Future brief (p.X) for
    this exercise.
    User Journey
    Mapping
    Understanding complex user
    YOU WILL NEED
    EXERCISE Smartphone with camera,
    paper, cardboard, masking tape,
    post-it notes, pens, optionally:
    video editing software
    In this exercise, you will create a 30-second video prototype to convey an idea for a
    product or service. You will learn how to use techniques to represent the interactions
    between people and a product or service through video.
    Video
    Prototyping
    Communicating design concepts
    ACADEMIC
    RESOURCES:
    YOU WILL NEED
    EXERCISE
    Arrange a workshop with one or more
    participants. Every participant should
    have recent experience of the problem
    domain.
    e.g. shopping for groceries in the
    supermarket
    Ask the participant(s) to use the
    provided images and materials to
    express their experiences (URL). They can
    glue these onto the A0 paper, arranged
    in such a way that they represent the
    participant’s routines and relationships.
    Your participant(s) can also use lines,
    annotations and sketches to accompany
    the pictures they have selected.
    E.g. A line connecting two pictures could
    represent a relationship
    E.g. Annotations can be used to clarify
    the choice of a picture.
    [25 minutes]
    Use the resulting map to interview
    your participant(s). Ask them questions
    about their activities, the people they
    interact with, the technologies they use,
    and the problems they face. Follow up
    any interesting points that you observed
    during the map-making. Take notes and/
    or record the conversation.
    Get your participant(s) to take
    photographs of the environment, objects
    and technologies they encounter in the
    problem domain, in the week after the
    workshop. Print these photos.
    [1 week]
    Conduct a second workshop where you
    ask the same participant(s) to augment
    their existing map with the photos
    they took. This will help to improve the
    representation and understanding of the
    problem domain.
    [20 minutes]
    1-3 people, A0 and A4 paper,
    coloured markers, pen,
    scissors, glue, sticky tape
    In this exercise, you will employ cartographic mapping to understand the practices
    of one or more participants, and identify opportunities for design solutions. Choose
    your own design problem, or focus on the Supermarket of the Future brief (p.X) and use
    the resources on the companion website (URL).
    Elovaara, P., & Mörtberg,
    C. (2010). Cartographic
    mappings: participative
    methods. In Proceedings
    of the 11th Biennial
    Participatory Design
    Conference (pp. 171-174).
    ACM.
    Finken, S., & Mörtberg,
    C. (2014). Performing
    Elderliness–Intra-actions
    with Digital Domestic
    Care Technologies. In IFIP
    International Conference
    on Human Choice and
    Computers (pp. 307-319).
    Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
    Mapping and other methods involving
    making collages are frequently employed
    in participatory design workshops to
    capture and understand domain-specific
    user knowledge. Cartographic mapping
    is a mapping method with a particular
    focus on the mediating role of the map-
    making activity in mutual knowledge
    construction. In this method, the facilitator
    and participant are working together on
    creating a visualisation of the participant’s
    daily routines, relationships and settings
    within a problem domain.
    A typical cartographic mapping process
    involves two stages taking place in a
    workshop setting: 1) making an initial
    map, and 2) enhancing the map through
    a participant-performed ethnographic
    study. In the first stage, workshop
    participants are asked to create a map
    of their relationships with other people,
    devices, and other material objects in their
    problem domain. A large blank paper,
    the various cut-out pictures, post-it notes,
    and colourful markers are provided for the
    activity. The participants place a picture
    representing themselves on the paper
    and then start to map relations with other
    entities around it. During this process,
    the workshop facilitator asks questions
    about the participants’ particular
    choices of images and the relationships
    being mapped. In the second stage,
    the participants are asked to take
    photographs of the setting relating to the
    problem domain to capture the details
    of their work or everyday routines. In a
    subsequent workshop, the participants
    add these photographs onto the maps
    they created in the first workshop to
    develop a better understanding of the
    problem domain.
    In addition to the creation of thick and
    rich visual representations of people’s
    daily routines, relationships and settings,
    the activity of map-making facilitates
    an informal conversation about the
    various problems and matters of concern
    supported by relevant visuals.
    Cartographic
    Mapping
    Generating rich depictions of settings
    and practices in a problem domain
    1 5
    6
    3
    4
    2
    34 35
    Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat.
    Cartographic Mapping
    EXERCISE YOU WILL NEED
    ACADEMIC
    RESOURCES:
    Decide what you want to achieve from
    the co-design workshop and write it
    down.
    E.g. A better way of buying fresh produce
    [5 minutes]
    Consider the logistics of your co-design
    workshop:
    • What kind of people should be there?
    E.g. frequent shoppers, avid cooks
    • How will you record it? E.g. notes,
    written feedback, observations, video
    • What is the order of activities and
    their duration? E.g. immersion,
    talking about current experiences,
    describing ideal experiences,
    evaluating initial concepts. Prepare a
    script.
    [20 minutes]
    Prepare the workshop materials. Use
    printed images to immerse participants
    in the problem space. Leverage existing
    sketches or prototypes of initial concepts
    or select examples from the resources
    (URL) for Supermarket of the Future.
    Identify methods to complete during the
    workshop such as:
    • Low-fidelity prototyping
    • Storyboarding
    [20 minutes]
    Prepare key questions for participants to
    use throughout the workshop.
    E.g. “What do you currently enjoy / not
    enjoy about shopping?”
    E.g. “What would an ideal shopping
    experience look like for you?”
    E.g. “What are some features of this
    design that you like?
    E.g. “What would you change?”
    [10 minutes]
    Run the workshop. Be sure to
    communicate the purpose and intended
    outcomes. Explain the purpose of the
    design, but without being too detailed,
    as this can limit the creativity of the
    participants. Introduce each activity as
    it starts. Allow participants to design
    concepts and augment existing ideas
    with their suggestions. Offer templates
    and frameworks to assist participants
    with completing the chosen methods.
    [1-4 hours]
    After the workshop you can interpret the
    collected data using a nity diagramming
    (p.X) or thematic analysis (p.X). Gather
    the feedback and concepts from co-
    designers. How does this influence the
    design concept?
    3+ people, pens, paper,
    an initial concept
    In this exercise, you will learn how to design and conduct a co-design workshop. You
    will decide what the purpose of the workshop is, who the participants are, and which
    methods to use. Focus on your own design problem or the Supermarket of the Future
    brief (p.X).
    Sanders, E. B. N. (2002). From
    user-centered to participatory
    design approaches. Design
    and the social sciences:
    Making connections, 1(8).
    Steen, M., Manschot, M. A. J., &
    De Koning, N. (2011). Benefits
    of co-design in service design
    projects. International Journal
    of Design 5 (2) 2011, 53-60.
    Co-design workshops bring users,
    customers, stakeholders and designers
    together to rapidly critique and iterate on
    design concepts, ensuring that their needs
    remain at the centre of the design process.
    Co-design and similar methodologies,
    such as participatory design, involve the
    users and other stakeholders participating
    actively, building on concepts they are
    presented with (be it a current user
    experience or a new design concept)
    and informing the future direction of
    the design. The principle of co-design is
    to “design with” rather than “designing
    for” people. Users and other stakeholders
    are in an active role, contributing to the
    design, rather than passively responding
    to design decisions.
    Co-design workshops build on this
    principle and include a preparation
    phase, recruitment phase, the workshop
    itself, interpretation and action. The first
    phase, preparation, is used to determine
    the overall direction for the workshop.
    This can involve the development of an
    initial concept that users can respond
    to, for example, in the form of a low-
    fidelity prototype (p.X) or storyboard (p.X).
    During the workshop, participants are
    taken through the stages of immersion,
    talking about current experiences, ideal
    experiences, and finally, evaluating and
    iterating the initial concept. Comments
    from participants along with any artefacts
    that were co-designed during the
    workshop are then analysed and fed back
    into the design process.
    Co-design workshops can be employed
    at any stage of the design process.
    During the research phase, they can
    be used to inform a complete view of
    people’s circumstances and situations. For
    projects that focus on the re-design of an
    existing product or service, this includes
    developing an understanding of how
    people currently make use of the product
    or service. During the prototyping phase,
    co-design workshops can be used to
    rapidly iterate concepts.
    Co-Design
    Workshops
    Designing with your
    participants
    1 4
    5
    6
    3
    2
    38 39
    Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat.
    Co-Design Workshop
    ACADEMIC
    RESOURCES:
    Goodman, E., Kuniavsky, M.,
    & Moed, A. (2012). Chapter
    9. Field Visits: Learning from
    Observation. In Observing
    the User Experience: A
    Practitioner’s Guide to User
    Research (pp.211-238). MA,
    USA: Elsevier.
    How to Conduct User
    Observations. (2017, February
    4). The Interaction Design
    Foundation. Retrieved from
    https://www.interaction-
    design.org/literature/article/
    how-to-conduct-user-
    observations
    Contextual observation can be used to
    study people’s behaviour in different
    environments, such as workplaces,
    their homes, public spaces, and so on.
    Experiences in real life don’t happen in a
    vacuum, and contextual observation takes
    into account the range of external factors
    that can influence people’s behaviour,
    such as environmental, temporal and
    social factors.
    Data collected through contextual
    observation includes user’s actions,
    physical posture, changes in facial
    expressions and gaze, and gestures in
    relation to a specific task, component or
    aspect of a product or service. Analysing
    these data can then reveal aspects of
    behaviours, workflows, and existing
    products or services. In contextual
    observation, data is mainly limited
    to people’s behaviour that is visually
    accessible, such as their reactions to
    input from the surrounding built or
    ambient environment, social interactions,
    and so on. These factors and the natural
    relationship between the user and the
    context would not be accounted for in
    observation carried out in the controlled
    environment of a lab.
    Contextual observation can be used for
    developing a better understanding of a
    design problem or context, as well as for
    gathering feedback about a prototype
    design. In the latter case, it provides
    a more natural alternative to usability
    testing (p.X), which is typically conducted
    in a structured lab environment.
    To ensure that the observation reveals
    useful data, some preparation is required.
    Most importantly, the objective of the
    observation has to be defined before the
    observation takes place. Other aspects
    to plan and consider include audience,
    location, time of the day, and day of the
    week.
    Contextual
    Observation
    Observing how people act in
    the wild
    42 Contextual Observation
    ACADEMIC
    RESOURCES:
    Madsen, K. H. (1994). A guide
    to metaphorical design.
    Communications of the ACM,
    37(12), 57-62.
    Hey, J., Linsey, J., Agogino,
    A. M., & Wood, K. L. (2008).
    Analogies and metaphors in
    creative design. International
    Journal of Engineering
    Education, 24(2), 283-294.
    Schön, D. (1979). Generative
    Metaphor: A Perspective on
    Problem-setting in Social
    Policy. In A. Ortony (Ed.)
    Metaphor and Thought
    (pp. 254-283). Cambridge:
    Cambridge University Press.
    In linguistics, metaphors are “A figure
    of speech in which a word or phrase is
    applied to an object or action to which
    it is not literally applicable” (Oxford
    Dictionary). In design, metaphors are used
    to refer to familiar precedents from the
    world around us. The metaphor assists the
    transfer of what we know in one domain
    (the source) into another different domain
    (the target).
    The desktop metaphor used in the
    graphical user interface of personal
    computers is a classic example of
    using a metaphor to aid conceptual
    understanding of interactions. Applying
    metaphors from an o ce environment
    allows people to easily learn how to
    perform interactions within a graphical
    user interface. Like on a physical desk, files
    are located inside folders. Unwanted files
    are dragged into a rubbish bin.
    Applying different metaphors during
    the conceptual design phase can
    reveal a variety of design solutions. For
    example, the metaphor of “computers as
    humans” leads to dialogue-based forms
    of interaction, whereas the metaphor
    of “computers as tools” leads to direct
    manipulation-based forms of interaction.
    Designs that are modelled on nature are
    also referred to as biomimicry. Far-fetched
    analogies can be used to spark ideas.
    Metaphors can also be used to generate
    new perspectives on a problem by seeing
    something as something else (Schön,
    1979). Metaphors can be applied in design
    to explore the problem domain from
    unusual and competing perspectives,
    and to reveal the hidden dimensions of a
    problem to be solved (Madsen, 1994). By
    applying a series of strategic questions,
    it is possible to unpack the metaphor
    and discover new understandings of and
    potential solutions to the problem at
    hand.
    Design by
    Metaphor
    The power of seeing
    something as something else
    48 Design by Metaphor
    Empathic
    Modelling
    Putting yourself in someone

    View full-size slide

  37. designthinkmakebreakrepeat.com
    Notes sheet
    xx Notes sheet
    Whys
    oblem:
    Why....
    Why....
    Why....
    Why....
    Why....
    k is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
    d by the authors of “Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat. A Handbook of Methods” (BIS Publishers)
    signthinkmakebreakrepeat.com
    Resources
    Bodystorming
    “Freeze” and “What-if” triggers
    Whenever the bodystorm is slowing down or inspiration starts to run low,
    consider changing the circumstances with one of the following triggers.
    To use these triggers one of the observers shouts freeze, and then adds a new
    detail/perspective/constraint/situation, introduced with the phrase “What if…”
    For example: “What if there was only one chair in the room?”.
    Add more detail to the characters …
    • Physical condition of the person
    • Mental/emotional state of the person
    • Their back-story
    • Who is accompanying them?
    Change the perspective …
    • Change character (young child, disabled person)
    • Change attitude or emotion
    • Act out what goes on inside a device or service
    Change situation …
    • Conflict situation
    • Supportive situation
    Add constraints …
    • Only one chair in the room
    • Electricity outage
    • Water costs a lot
    Notes sheet
    Brainwriting 6-3-5
    Question/problem:
    Idea
    1
    Idea
    2
    Idea
    3
    Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 4 Round 5 Round 6
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
    Designed by the authors of “Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat. A Handbook of Methods” (BIS Publishers)
    www.designthinkmakebreakrepeat.com
    Business Model Experimentation
    Shopping experience of the future
    Digi Shop: Complete online store- automated shopping experience.
    Customer-led template focus explores the diverse possibilities that lie within
    new and untouched customer segments.
    Customer Segments: Digital natives but customer experience conscious
    Value proposition: Low cost provider, but excel in customer experience
    Channels: One direct online, 24/7 messaging, ordering and account
    management channel
    Customer Relationships: Personalised, direct
    Revenue Streams: Product sales
    Cost Structure: Higher core costs personnel, reduction of asset costs
    Key Activities: Training of staff, online presence
    Key Resources: personnel, technology
    Key Partners: Suppliers.
    Cost-driven template focus looks at ways of reducing expenses in order to
    find opportunities elsewhere.
    Cost Structure: Cheaper, lean, low capital costs, low ongoing costs
    Value proposition: Low cost provider, only pay for what they use
    Channels: Online only, limited customer support
    Customer Relationships: Quick and accessible at all times
    Customer Segments: Digital natives but cost conscious
    Revenue Streams: Product sales, online advertisements
    Key Activities: Online presence, sales and marketing
    Key Resources: Personnel, physical real estate for warehouse, technology
    Key Partners: Suppliers, delivery companies
    Partnership-led focus is the exploration of new resources and capabilities
    from external partnerships.
    Key Partners: Partner with car-riding and sharing services such as Uber, Lyft,
    Car next door
    Value proposition: Save money and time shopping and traveling
    Channels: All online, use of website and mobile applications
    Notes shee
    Key Partners Key Activities Value Propositions Customer
    Relationships
    Customer
    Segments
    Key Resources Channels
    Cost Structure Revenue Streams
    Based on the original Business Model Canvas by Strategyzer AG: strategyzer.com
    Business Model Canvas

    View full-size slide

  38. The idea of placing people at the centre
    of the design process emerged in
    response to the pace of technological
    development towards the end of the 20th
    century. At this time, the array of digital
    solutions for everyday problems grew
    rapidly, spurred by the mass adoption of
    personal computers, the declining cost of
    electronics, and advances in information
    and communication technologies.
    However, the new products and services
    that emerged were often difficult and
    frustrating to use. Human-centred design
    arose as a sorely needed reaction to a tech
    industry that was in denial (Cooper, 2000);
    it placed people firmly at the centre of
    the design process using an array of new
    methods.
    Over time, the field of human-centred
    design perfected the art of creating
    products and services that satisfy people’s
    needs. But while striving to tackle
    immediate problems, we sometimes
    lost sight of the bigger picture and
    now face the unintended downstream
    consequences of our design decisions. In
    the past decades, design has mostly been
    used as a tool of the market to achieve
    short-term gains for businesses and
    investors. This focus has diminished the
    potential of design as a tool that enables
    deep exploration of decisions before
    they are made (Dunne & Raby, 2013).
    Focusing on short-term gains carries the
    risk that our design decisions are to the
    detriment of future generations and the
    health of our planet. In order to shift our
    frame of thinking and plan for a better
    future for the next generation, we can
    use the notion of ‘cathedral thinking’
    (Rogers, 1995). This concept reminds us
    that mediaeval architects drafting the
    initial blueprints for a cathedral did so
    knowing that they would not be alive
    by the time it was completed. Cathedral
    thinking encourages us to extend our
    perspectives beyond people’s needs
    right at this moment and to focus on
    intergenerational considerations instead.
    Using the lens of long-term cathedral
    thinking, it becomes apparent how
    much we have sacrificed on the altar of
    short-term gains. While technological
    advancement has brought us longer lives,
    over time it has degraded the environment
    with which our own wellbeing is so closely
    intertwined. The motorisation of cities has
    led to air pollution, which now poses one
    of the greatest health risks (Head, 2011).
    Modern urban planning initiatives driven
    by technological innovation in the late 19th
    century have enabled the construction of
    motorways, reducing habitats for people
    and wildlife (Johnson, 2011). There is a risk
    that the application of human-centred
    approaches to solving these problems will
    lead to equally anthropocentric solutions.
    That is, solutions that may benefit people
    in the short-term while failing to consider
    the long-term impact on society and
    ecological systems. As the description of
    Mike Monteiro’s book Ruined by Design
    states, ‘The world is working exactly as
    designed. And it’s not working very well.
    Which means we need to do a better job
    of designing it.’ (Monteiro, 2019). Just 20
    years after the dawn of a millennium that
    was full of promise, we find ourselves in
    an untenable situation; facing natural
    disasters, an ongoing refugee crisis and a
    global pandemic.
    This is by no means a new concern. For
    example, Victor Papanek, in his 1972 book,
    wrote ‘There are professions more harmful
    than industrial design, but only a very
    14
    Life-centred Design
    By Madeleine Borthwick and Martin Tomitsch
    Introduction
    few of them.’ (Papanek, 1972, p.ix). As we
    extend our ways of thinking and working
    to consider all elements of human and
    non-human life, we need to build on
    this previously developed knowledge
    across fields. More than ever, we need to
    collaborate across disciplines to develop a
    collective understanding, where the whole
    is greater than the sum of its parts. Some
    of the methods in this book explicitly
    invite the involvement of experts in design
    workshops, for example, using STEP
    cards (p.XX). Collaboration has emerged
    as another theme, with methods such
    as design team cards (p.XX) and values
    cartouche (p.XX) to assist interdisciplinary
    teams with working together.
    This book builds on the paradigm of
    human-centred design but encourages
    us to think about the wider impact of
    our designs. It puts forward a selection of
    methods that help to provide an antidote
    to short-term and anthropocentric
    thinking. To that end, the methods go
    beyond previous notions of sustainable
    design or ecodesign, which focus
    on finding more sustainable ways of
    creating products and services. Instead,
    this book contributes to the emerging
    field of post-anthropocentric design
    by decentering the human from the
    design process (Forlano, 2016). Offering
    concrete, structured step-by-step guides,
    the methods allow us to consider the
    viewpoints of all living things through
    using non-human personas (p.XX), to
    speculate about utopian and dystopian
    futures (p.XX), to make long-term
    decisions using scenario-based thinking
    (p.XX), to consider the far-reaching
    consequences of our actions with the
    impact ripple canvas (p.XX) and to use
    backcasting (p.XX) to develop a roadmap
    to a better future.
    Collectively, these methods point towards
    a new role of design, a fifth level, where
    design is used as a framework for
    strategic action. Building on the previous
    levels outlined in Figure 1, strategic
    design suggests a role for design in
    understanding the complex connections
    and networks of systems, and their impact
    on human health, planetary health,
    sustainability and issues of security. To
    create innovative solutions within the
    framework of life-centred design, we
    need to consider not only the feasibility,
    viability and desirability of future designs
    but also to understand our responsibility
    as designers. This includes analysing
    and reflecting on the environmental
    and ethical values of our designs. Life-
    centred design encourages us to draw on
    intergenerational knowledge, to assess
    the long-term impact of our design
    solutions and to consider the perspectives
    of all living things in the design process.
    Figure 3: Life-centred design expands
    the human-centred focus of a design
    process (as originally published by
    IDEO) by adding considerations about
    what is environmentally and ethically
    responsible.
    REFERENCES:
    Cooper, A. (1999). The inmates
    are running the asylum.
    Indianapolis, IA: SAMS.
    Macmillan.
    Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2013).
    Speculative everything: design,
    fiction, and social dreaming.
    MIT Press.
    Forlano, L. (2016). Decentering
    the Human in the Design of
    Collaborative Cities. Design
    Issues, 32(3), MIT Press, 42–54.
    Head, P. (2011). Healthy cities in
    an ecological age. World Health
    Design, 4(3), 10–14. https://
    www.designandhealth.org/
    resource_library/healthy-city-
    design-july-2011/
    Johnson, M. (2011). Life-
    changing regeneration. World
    Health Design, 4(3), 15–19.
    https://www.designandhealth.
    org/resource_library/healthy-
    city-design-july-2011/
    Monteiro, M. (2019). Ruined
    by Design: How Designers
    Destroyed the World, and
    What We Can Do to Fix It.
    Independently Published.
    Papanek, V. (1984). Design
    for the Real world. Thames &
    Hudson. UK
    Rogers, J. E. (1995).
    Environmental leadership
    in a boundary‐less world.
    Environmental Quality
    Management, 4(2), John Wiley
    & Sons, Inc.
    15
    Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat.

    View full-size slide

  39. The University of Sydney
    Non-human personas

    View full-size slide

  40. @martintom
    City apps

    View full-size slide

  41. @martintom
    City apps

    View full-size slide

  42. Photos provided by Daktronics

    View full-size slide

  43. Source: http://www.samadesign.com.au/parklet/

    View full-size slide

  44. Capstone research project by Dan Vo (Master of Interaction Design & Electronic Arts)

    View full-size slide

  45. Type/species:
    Age/life span:
    Local population:
    Needs/motivation:
    Challenges/stressors:
    Interacts with the following:
    Habitat:
    Descriptive narrative of behaviour for one [hour/day/month/year] select one:
    Structure guide
    Non-human Personas
    Name:
    miro.com/app/board/o9J_l2wNzU8=/
    Edition
    Design.
    Think.
    Make.
    Break.
    Repeat.
    A Handbook
    of Methods
    Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat.
    A Handbook of Methods
    “Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do
    eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut
    enim ad minim veniam, quis” - Quote author
    This book introduces the reader to the changing role of design as a way of
    thinking and a framework for solving complex problems and achieving systemic
    change. It documents 80 methods that cover all stages of a design process,
    providing actionable guidance for applying the methods across a range of
    projects. The methods are complemented by seven case studies to demonstrate
    their application in different domains, from designing interfaces for autonomous
    vehicles to addressing health and wellbeing. Free templates and resources,
    available at designthinkmakebreakrepeat.com, make this a great resource for
    design educators as well as practitioners leading workshops in their organisation
    or looking for inspiration to transform their practice.
    In this revised edition, the authors look beyond the human-centred design
    paradigm and provide an introduction to life-centred design. This extended focus
    is reinforced through design methods for considering the broader ecosystem
    in which products and services are used, including the use of natural resources,
    ethical concerns and the long-term impact of design decisions.
    Design.
    Think.
    Make.
    Break.
    Repeat.
    A Handbook
    of Methods
    Authors
    Martin Tomitsch (ed.)
    Madeleine Borthwick (ed.)
    Naseem Ahmadpour
    Clare Cooper
    Jessica Frawley
    Leigh-Anne Hepburn
    A. Baki Kocaballi
    Lian Loke
    Claudia Nunez-Pacheco
    Karla Straker
    Cara Wrigley
    9 789063 695859
    ISBN 978-90-636958-5-9
    Revised: 20 new methods
    and an introduction to
    life-centred design

    View full-size slide

  46. Type/species: Brush-tailed possum
    Age/Lifespan: 13 Years
    Local Population: Estimated 30 million
    in Australia
    Needs/motivations: It’s getting harder
    for Beans to find a home to rest, and
    sources of food are being slowly replaced
    by a concrete landscape.
    Challenges/stressors: Sometimes Beans is captured by humans and is transported to
    a location away from where he usually scavenges for food and resides. Being held in an
    enclosure while Beans is transported and being displaced causes great stress to him.
    Most of the time, Beans can find food he is familiar with, consuming flora and insects
    located in gardens and trees around his local area. Occasionally Beans encounters human
    food and eats it without knowing it may not be healthy for him; sometimes it makes him
    sick afterwards.
    Interacts with the following: Other possums, humans and native flora
    Habitat: Beans usually prefers a place high above the ground away from other species
    that might harm him. The current alternative to a tree to call home is finding small
    openings into the rooftops of human structures, where he can shelter. Beans does
    his best to stay out the way of other possums to avoid confrontation, as they are very
    territorial.
    Descriptive narrative of behaviour: Beans is most active at night under the cover of
    darkness, searching for food. This nightly activity disrupts sleeping humans and this
    causes them to attempt to scare beans out of their roof or garden.
    Persona (1)
    Non-human Personas
    Name: Beans
    designthinkmakebreakrepeat.com
    miro.com/app/board/o9J_l2wNzU8=/
    Edition
    Design.
    Think.
    Make.
    Break.
    Repeat.
    A Handbook
    of Methods
    Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat.
    A Handbook of Methods
    “Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do
    eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut
    enim ad minim veniam, quis” - Quote author
    This book introduces the reader to the changing role of design as a way of
    thinking and a framework for solving complex problems and achieving systemic
    change. It documents 80 methods that cover all stages of a design process,
    providing actionable guidance for applying the methods across a range of
    projects. The methods are complemented by seven case studies to demonstrate
    their application in different domains, from designing interfaces for autonomous
    vehicles to addressing health and wellbeing. Free templates and resources,
    available at designthinkmakebreakrepeat.com, make this a great resource for
    design educators as well as practitioners leading workshops in their organisation
    or looking for inspiration to transform their practice.
    In this revised edition, the authors look beyond the human-centred design
    paradigm and provide an introduction to life-centred design. This extended focus
    is reinforced through design methods for considering the broader ecosystem
    in which products and services are used, including the use of natural resources,
    ethical concerns and the long-term impact of design decisions.
    Design.
    Think.
    Make.
    Break.
    Repeat.
    A Handbook
    of Methods
    Authors
    Martin Tomitsch (ed.)
    Madeleine Borthwick (ed.)
    Naseem Ahmadpour
    Clare Cooper
    Jessica Frawley
    Leigh-Anne Hepburn
    A. Baki Kocaballi
    Lian Loke
    Claudia Nunez-Pacheco
    Karla Straker
    Cara Wrigley
    9 789063 695859
    ISBN 978-90-636958-5-9
    Revised: 20 new methods
    and an introduction to
    life-centred design

    View full-size slide

  47. Source: Tomitsch, M., Fredericks, J., Frawley, J. & Foth, M. Non-human Personas: Including Nature in the Participatory Design of Smart Cities (under review)

    View full-size slide

  48. Top-
    down
    bodies
    Bottom-
    up
    bodies
    Coalition
    Data centres
    Video
    streaming

    app
    Ecosystem
    Non-
    human
    persona
    Top
    dow
    bodi
    Botto
    up
    bodi
    Coali
    Non
    huma
    perso

    View full-size slide

  49. Covid-19
    [Your
    company’s
    product]
    🦠


    Covid-19
    🧑💻🧑🏫


    Home-
    schooling
    parent

    View full-size slide

  50. [1] Frawley, J. K., & Dyson, L. E. (2014, December). Animal personas: acknowledging non-human stakeholders in designing for sustainable food
    systems. In Proceedings of the 26th Australian Computer-Human Interaction Conference on Designing Futures: The Future of Design (pp. 21-30).


    [2] Sznel, M. (2020). Your next persona will be non-human — tools for environment-centered designers, Medium, available at: https://uxdesign.cc/
    your-next-persona-will-be-non-human-tools-for-environment-centered-designers-c7ff96dc2b17


    [3] Tomlinson, B., Nardi, B., Stokols, D., & Raturi, A. (2021). Ecosystemas: Representing Ecosystem Impacts in Design. In Extended Abstracts of the 2021
    CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-10).


    “Your next persona will be
    non-human — tools for
    environment-centered
    designers” [2]
    CHI ’21 Extended Abstracts, May 8–13, 2021, Yokohama, Japan Tomlinson et al.
    Figure 1: An ecosystema for the Amazon rainforest.
    for a broader conceptualization of environmental “users” - includ-
    ing, for example, residents geographically removed from the direct
    impacts of a particular building or other designed structure, whose
    health may be impacted by the carbon emissions or air pollution
    emitted at the site of origin due to atmospheric or marine trans-
    port of carbon and pollutants emitted at one site to more distant
    “telecoupled” regions [88]. (See also [58, 59] for further articula-
    tions of telecoupling and systems integration.) The “deep ecology”
    movement embraces the principle of “biocentrism” or “biocentric
    egalitarianism” (vs. anthropocentrism) and is premised on the idea
    that humans must be decentered, or relegated to a less powerful
    and preeminent role in ecosystems, if those systems and the di-
    verse species that comprise them are to survive and thrive (see for
    example [24, 61, 64]). As Stokols has written: “[a]nthropocentrism
    prioritizes human needs over those of other species...Deep ecol-
    ogists believe that biospheric harmony can be regained only if
    people reject their anthropocentric biases and embrace biocentric
    egalitarianism. Biocentrism holds that all life forms have an ‘equal
    right to live and blossom’ ([64], p.96).” ([88], p.267) Social ecologist
    Murray Bookchin has written about the evolution from biological
    and societal nature to “thinking nature” in which humans’ reason-
    ing capacities would be applied to ecosystem design in ways that
    promote more equitable relationships between humans and other
    species [10, 11]. The ecosystema concept builds on these ideas and
    broadens this perspective to include the interests and rights of
    nonhuman species and ecosystems in design processes.
    Relationships between humans and nonhumans have been stud-
    ied within design and computing as well. Most similar to the work
    described here is the concept of “animal personas” [33]. These ani-
    mal personas have been proposed to account for species-specic
    considerations in the design of online systems used in animal agri-
    culture, such as farming chickens. Similarly, “canine personas” have
    been put forth in the emerging area of Animal Computer Interac-
    tion, where technologies, such as digital emergency alarms, are
    designed specically to be used by animals [86]. Raturi proposed
    the need for “system personas” [81]—a design concept that repre-
    sents the system that the human is interacting with rather than the
    human themselves, and instantiated these as “farm personas” used
    in the design of digital technologies for sustainable agriculture. In
    the case of farm personas, the farms were detailed constructions of
    ctitious yet archetypal farms based on interviews with farmers
    and visits to small- to medium scale farms in California. Raturi
    demonstrated how such an approach can be used to develop sys-
    tem archetypes grounded in a critical analysis of real systems, and
    subsequently used in information design.
    Beyond the connection to personas, other scholars have also
    engaged with nonhumans in design. DiSalvo and Lukens engaged
    with the role of nonhumans in design, providing an introduction to
    “Ecosystemas: Representing
    Ecosystem Impacts in
    Design” [3]
    distinguish
    business. In
    ve tools and
    tandings of
    gn process.
    ersona was
    nline recipe
    ions.
    ng in urban
    agriculture
    case study
    wider study
    on way for
    uce and for
    hat to eat”.
    ns through
    and eating.
    pt that used
    he farming
    to represent
    not present
    n interviews
    and urban
    ary to create
    y was the
    ooper, 2004
    1.). Though
    the form of
    yers on the
    lour that are
    representation of the animal and provided a means of
    thinking of this stakeholder throughout the design process
    most notably during early paper prototyping.
    Name: Betsy
    Age: 12 months
    Breed: ISA Brown
    Lives: In a mobile hen house in the New South
    Wales’ Southern Highlands, Australia.
    Betsy started laying eggs at about 6months of age and is
    working at laying 1 egg a day, although on a good day
    she’ll sometimes lay two. She wakes up at dawn and
    takes herself to bed at dusk. In the mobile hen house
    there are 300 other ISA Browns all of whom lay eggs,
    and scratch around the field during the day. She has a
    curious disposition and if doors are left open she’ll go in
    and explore. She once got into the farmhouse. To allow
    her to move around safely the farm has several large
    Maremma dogs- that are trained to guard her and the
    other girls. Though as a pullet she found the dogs scary
    she is now used to their presence on the farm. She likes
    green vegetables and has several times broken into the
    vegetable patch when the electric fence was turned off.
    She enjoys being around the human farmers and doesn’t
    mind being picked up- in fact there is a spot under her
    chin that she quite likes having stroked. However she is
    soon eager to be back on the ground with the other
    chickens, eating, pecking and taking dust baths in the
    dirt under the trees.
    Table 1. Persona description.
    27
    “Animal Personas:
    Acknowledging non-
    human


    stakeholders in
    designing for
    sustainable food
    systems” [1]

    View full-size slide

  51. The University of Sydney
    Systems maps

    View full-size slide

  52. Life is not a human-centred affair
    but a
    complex
    network.



    —Stefano Mancuso

    Source: At A Distance podcast


    Image Source: Markus Spiske via Unsplash

    View full-size slide

  53. Video featuring: Professor Steve Simpson, Director of the Charles Perkins Centre;

    recorded for OLET5702 Complex Problem-Solving coordinated by A/Professor Maryanne Large
    Systems maps in
    Health

    View full-size slide

  54. Systems map example from OLET5702 Complex Problem-Solving; template designed by Melinda Gaughwin
    Participatory systems mapping

    View full-size slide

  55. The University of Sydney
    Impact ripple canvas

    View full-size slide

  56. Source: Tomitsch et al. (2021). Design Think Make Break Repeat. BIS Publishers


    Image: Luca Iaconelli via Unsplash
    … think beyond what we are trained and used
    to seeing by
    visualising
    unexpected
    connections.

    View full-size slide

  57. ACTION
    DIRECT IMPACT
    INDIRECT IMPACT
    BIG PICTURE IMPACT
    Canvas
    Impact Ripple Canvas
    miro.com/app/board/o9J_l21H21U=/
    Based on the original canvas created by: Dr Manuela Taboada &

    Dr Md Shahiduzzaman for the QUT Chair in Digital Economy, June 2019
    Edition
    Design.
    Think.
    Make.
    Break.
    Repeat.
    A Handbook
    of Methods
    Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat.
    A Handbook of Methods
    “Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do
    eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut
    enim ad minim veniam, quis” - Quote author
    This book introduces the reader to the changing role of design as a way of
    thinking and a framework for solving complex problems and achieving systemic
    change. It documents 80 methods that cover all stages of a design process,
    providing actionable guidance for applying the methods across a range of
    projects. The methods are complemented by seven case studies to demonstrate
    their application in different domains, from designing interfaces for autonomous
    vehicles to addressing health and wellbeing. Free templates and resources,
    available at designthinkmakebreakrepeat.com, make this a great resource for
    design educators as well as practitioners leading workshops in their organisation
    or looking for inspiration to transform their practice.
    In this revised edition, the authors look beyond the human-centred design
    paradigm and provide an introduction to life-centred design. This extended focus
    is reinforced through design methods for considering the broader ecosystem
    in which products and services are used, including the use of natural resources,
    ethical concerns and the long-term impact of design decisions.
    Design.
    Think.
    Make.
    Break.
    Repeat.
    A Handbook
    of Methods
    Authors
    Martin Tomitsch (ed.)
    Madeleine Borthwick (ed.)
    Naseem Ahmadpour
    Clare Cooper
    Jessica Frawley
    Leigh-Anne Hepburn
    A. Baki Kocaballi
    Lian Loke
    Claudia Nunez-Pacheco
    Karla Straker
    Cara Wrigley
    9 789063 695859
    ISBN 978-90-636958-5-9
    Revised: 20 new methods
    and an introduction to
    life-centred design

    View full-size slide

  58. Created by: Dr Manuela Taboada & Dr Md Shahiduzzaman for the Chair in Digital Economy, June 2019
    ACTION
    DIRECT IMPACT
    INDIRECT IMPACT
    BIG PICTURE IMPACT
    miro.com/app/board/o9J_l21H21U=/
    Edition
    Design.
    Think.
    Make.
    Break.
    Repeat.
    A Handbook
    of Methods
    Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat.
    A Handbook of Methods
    “Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do
    eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut
    enim ad minim veniam, quis” - Quote author
    This book introduces the reader to the changing role of design as a way of
    thinking and a framework for solving complex problems and achieving systemic
    change. It documents 80 methods that cover all stages of a design process,
    providing actionable guidance for applying the methods across a range of
    projects. The methods are complemented by seven case studies to demonstrate
    their application in different domains, from designing interfaces for autonomous
    vehicles to addressing health and wellbeing. Free templates and resources,
    available at designthinkmakebreakrepeat.com, make this a great resource for
    design educators as well as practitioners leading workshops in their organisation
    or looking for inspiration to transform their practice.
    In this revised edition, the authors look beyond the human-centred design
    paradigm and provide an introduction to life-centred design. This extended focus
    is reinforced through design methods for considering the broader ecosystem
    in which products and services are used, including the use of natural resources,
    ethical concerns and the long-term impact of design decisions.
    Design.
    Think.
    Make.
    Break.
    Repeat.
    A Handbook
    of Methods
    Authors
    Martin Tomitsch (ed.)
    Madeleine Borthwick (ed.)
    Naseem Ahmadpour
    Clare Cooper
    Jessica Frawley
    Leigh-Anne Hepburn
    A. Baki Kocaballi
    Lian Loke
    Claudia Nunez-Pacheco
    Karla Straker
    Cara Wrigley
    9 789063 695859
    ISBN 978-90-636958-5-9
    Revised: 20 new methods
    and an introduction to
    life-centred design

    View full-size slide

  59. The University of Sydney

    View full-size slide

  60. PLAY IN SD AND SAVE EMISSIONS i

    View full-size slide

  61. PLAY IN SD AND SAVE EMISSIONS i
    86%

    View full-size slide

  62. Source: http://blog.buysmart.global/smart-buy-at-the-book-depository/

    View full-size slide

  63. 2. Shipping Options
    Ship each item individually
    Combine items if possible
    3. Billing Address

    View full-size slide

  64. App available at: goodonyou.eco


    Phone frame by Min Tram via sketchappresources.com
    Good On You

    View full-size slide

  65. PLANETARY HEALTH
    STAR RATING

    View full-size slide

  66. The University of Sydney

    View full-size slide

  67. Users
    UX
    Needs/desires Satisfaction

    View full-size slide

  68. Stakeholders are
    demanding
    account-
    ability to address
    negative impacts.

    Source: https://www.bcg.com/publications/2021/keys-to-being-a-leader-in-sustainable-business-model-innovation

    View full-size slide

  69. Stakeholder expectations from all sides
    are
    demanding
    accountability
    to address negative impacts and
    increasingly demanding that companies
    go beyond mitigation and demonstrate
    positive environmental and societal
    benefits.

    Source: https://www.bcg.com/publications/2021/keys-to-being-a-leader-in-sustainable-business-model-innovation

    View full-size slide

  70. Beyond-human design


    Ecosystem design


    Earth-centred design


    Life-centred design


    More-than-human design


    Transition design

    View full-size slide

  71. Primary
    stakeholders
    (users)
    UX
    Secondary
    stakeholders
    Non-human
    stakeholders
    Beyond-human design


    Ecosystem design


    Earth-centred design


    Life-centred design


    More-than-human design

    View full-size slide

  72. Primary
    stakeholders
    (users)
    360-degree UX
    Secondary
    stakeholders
    Non-human
    stakeholders
    Beyond-human design


    Ecosystem design


    Earth-centred design


    Life-centred design


    More-than-human design

    View full-size slide

  73. Primary
    stakeholders
    (users)
    360-degree UX
    Secondary
    stakeholders
    Non-human
    stakeholders Non-human personas


    Systems maps


    Impact ripple canvas
    Beyond-human design


    Ecosystem design


    Earth-centred design


    Life-centred design


    More-than-human design

    View full-size slide

  74. Martin Tomitsch


    [email protected]


    www.linkedin.com/in/martintomitsch/


    Instagram @martintomitsch


    Twitter @martintom
    Thanks/
    inspiration


    Madeleine Borthwick


    Glenda Caldwell


    Anthony Capon


    Marcus Foth


    Jessica Frawley


    Joel Fredericks


    Melinda Gaughwin


    Maryanne Large


    Manuela Taboada


    Dan Vo


    At A Distance podcast


    Ruined by Design
    Design Lab


    School of Architecture,
    Design and Planning


    The University of Sydney


    design.sydney.edu.au
    Edition
    Design.
    Think.
    Make.
    Break.
    Repeat.
    A Handbook
    of Methods
    Design. Think. Make. Break. Repeat.
    A Handbook of Methods
    “Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do
    eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut
    enim ad minim veniam, quis” - Quote author
    This book introduces the reader to the changing role of design as a way of
    thinking and a framework for solving complex problems and achieving systemic
    change. It documents 80 methods that cover all stages of a design process,
    providing actionable guidance for applying the methods across a range of
    projects. The methods are complemented by seven case studies to demonstrate
    their application in different domains, from designing interfaces for autonomous
    vehicles to addressing health and wellbeing. Free templates and resources,
    available at designthinkmakebreakrepeat.com, make this a great resource for
    design educators as well as practitioners leading workshops in their organisation
    or looking for inspiration to transform their practice.
    In this revised edition, the authors look beyond the human-centred design
    paradigm and provide an introduction to life-centred design. This extended focus
    is reinforced through design methods for considering the broader ecosystem
    in which products and services are used, including the use of natural resources,
    ethical concerns and the long-term impact of design decisions.
    Design.
    Think.
    Make.
    Break.
    Repeat.
    A Handbook
    of Methods
    Authors
    Martin Tomitsch (ed.)
    Madeleine Borthwick (ed.)
    Naseem Ahmadpour
    Clare Cooper
    Jessica Frawley
    Leigh-Anne Hepburn
    A. Baki Kocaballi
    Lian Loke
    Claudia Nunez-Pacheco
    Karla Straker
    Cara Wrigley
    9 789063 695859
    ISBN 978-90-636958-5-9
    Revised: 20 new methods
    and an introduction to
    life-centred design
    designthinkmakebreakrepeat.com

    View full-size slide